Seventy-Fifth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSrrY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORiTY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

GOVERNING CODE:
Problems of Anarchy
Must Be, Solved by Law

-

Where Opinions Are Fe 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR MIcH.
Truth Will Prevail,

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: ROBERT MOORE

Senator's Film on Africa-:
Harmful, Unrealistic

IN A WAY it was probably inevitable.
But Senator Allen J. Ellender's recent-
ly-released film "Africa Today" must be
taken as the epitome of the extensive
damage that can be caused by the unin-
formed extension of congressmen's be-
liefs into international diplomacy.
The film, the Louisiana senator's reno-
vation of the white man's burden, was
shot at his own expense while on a 1962
tour of Africa at "watchdog" for the Sen-
ate Appropriations Committee. Running.
for some two hours, it is evidently a com-
bination of Ellender's views as to what
Africa either is or should be (the line
between the two is very fine, indeed).
Ellender's conclusions are a veritable
library'of neocolonialism: most Africans
cannot govern without white help; apart-
heid isn't such a bad idea after all; Unit-
ed States aid grants to the Ivory Coast
"are ridiculous" because "the country has
a balanced budget"; in South Africa, "I
found no evidence that the natives suf-
fered under the bonds of reactionary col-
onialism.".
These opinions and others like them
will probably come under little attack.
In the first place, many congressmen may
find them difficult to regard as needing
attack. For example, Ellender's compari-
son of the Dutch Boer's conquest of the
Zulus to the pioneer's conquest of the
Indians is historically valid.
Only when it is realized that this is
little defense of the Boer conquest, even
less a defense of its far more extensive
results, can the film be attacked; unfor-
tunately, floor comment in Congress is
usually lacking such subtlety.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE of Ellender's com-
ments is his statement that many Afri-
cans cannot govern without white help.
Certainly it may be true that many need
help. But why "white" help? Why not yel-
low help or brown help? ,Ellender's con-
veniently defensible prejudice is glaring.f
A second reason why "Africa Today"
will probably come under little attack is
that it will appear reasonable to many
people in the American context. In many
senators' minds the fact that the Ivory
Coast has a balanced budget may appear
to be a pretty fair reason for suspending
U.S. aid to that country.'
But why is that budget balanced? Is

it because income is large or because
government expenditure is so pitifully
small? Many senators feel that balanced
budgets have more popuar appeal in Afri-
ca than full stomachs.
Though it may meet little criticism,
Ellender's newsreel is probably just what
the Senate Subcommittee on National,
Security had in mind early last May when
it sharply attacked those "members of
Congress (who) peddle, sometimes in an
irresponsible manner, their own special
tonics for our national aches and pains."
Except that in Ellender's case, it is an
indefensible analysis of the national
aches and pains of others.
IT WOULD BE BAD ENOUGH if all El-
lender had done were to warp Ameri-
can attitudes toward Africa. This, how-
ever, is only a secondary fault.
His true harm will be in the effects his
film may have on African attitudes to-
ward the U.S. While on the trip itself,
he was barred from four African nations,
Uganda, Tanganyika, Kenya and Ethio-
pia, because of comments "considered
insulting' " to Africans.
It is no small thing when a member of
what is supposedly the highest governing
body in the U.S. has to be kept out of one
of the world's areas where U.S. influence
is at a low ebb. To have him then com-
pound his original mistakes with a film
containing their high points is truly un-
believable.
The entire episode points up Congress'
need to exercise some self-policing on its
members relations with other nations.
At the very least, Ellender's film, and his
statements which preceded it, must cer-
tainly have made a lasting bad impres-
sion on Africa. At the most, "Africa To-
day" has made Congress appear to es-
pouse a view of Africa which, hopefully,
few of its members would care to be con-
nected with.
IN EITHER CASE, Ellender's roadshow
has done U.S. foreign policy a grave
disservice; it should not be given a chance
to repeat itself. If, as it appears, Con-
gress is willing to help its country dip-
lomatically, it seems the least it could do
would be to keep its more irresponsible
members from making things worse.
-LEONARD PRATT

By NORMAN COUSINS
Saturday Review
WORLD LAW is both simple
and complex. It is simple in
terms of the underlying principles.
It is complex in terms of the
problems involved in creating the
machinery to operate it and the
balances that would have to be
built into it to keep it from be-
coming an instrument of abuse.
The concept is simple in the
sense that law is the natural
foundation of group living.
The governing code or rules of
the society may be oral or writ-
ten, formal or informal, crude or
refined, minimal or maximal, but
they represent a specific descrip-
tion of acceptable and unaccept-
able behavior.
THE ALTERNATIVE is anarchy
-not the philosophical anarchy
which, in the Kropotkin sense,
can come about through the high-
er development of the human in-
tellect, enabling man to be truly
unfettered, but the raw anarchy
that produces lawlessness, chaos
and violence.
In attempting to governa com-
munity or group doesn't assume
that all men are inherently evil.
The experience of the race offers
evidence that the behavior of man
tends to vary with the circum-
stances.
Under conditions of stability
and order, men are inclined to be
reasonable and productive. When
law is minimized or absent, they
have a tendency to be antisocial,
irresponsible and violent. The
same is equally true of clusters of
men in their group relationships.
Therefore, the purpose of law,
either for man or his group, is to
create those conditions that in-
hibit the negative tendencies and
favor the positive ones. This is
done by defining obligations, set-
ting up deterrents to antisocial or
criminal behavior, and dealing
with violations.
THE PARADOX, however, is
that the natural role of law in
human society does not extend to-
day to the area that needs it most,
the community of nations. Here,
the conditions favor the ascen-
dancy of human malevolence over
human decency.
The individual who lies or cheats
or kills in his own interest is
considered unworthy or reprehen-
sible, but if he lies or cheats or
kills in the national interest he
may be considered a hero. Moral-
ity within a nation is considered a
virtue, but morality among na-
tions is often considered unwork-
able or naive or irrelevant.
In international affairs, desir-
able behavior is represented by
the achievement of objectives, not
by abstract principle of good con-
duct..
Thus the dominant condition of
man on earth today is anarchy.
All the institutions developed over
long centuries for protecting the
individual are puny and unwork-
able alongside man's vulnerability
to anarchy.
SINCE FREEDOM is impossible
without law, the absence of law
in the world arena is destructive
of freedom within the units of the
arena, which is to say, within the
nations themselves.
The ultimate affect of anarchy,
in the context of world anarchy,
is that of a madman with a torch
in everyman's home. World an-
archy plus nuclear weapons equal
insanity and the decimation of the
human community.
Absolute national sovereignty-
that is to say, the habit of nations
in acting outside law in their ex-
ternal affairs and putting their
national interest above the human
interest-thus becomes inconsis-
tent with the well-being and ul-

timately the survival of the human
race..
The most significant feature of
our age, therefore, is that the na-
tional sovereign state, at one time
an indispensable device for carry-

ing on the essential business of
the human race and for safe-
guarding large numbers of people,
is today an unworkable, precarious
and lethal mechanism.
IT CAN no longer protect the
lives, properties, traditions and
culture of its members or foster
the conditions that make for the
health of the society as a whole.
The same scientific revolution
that made it possible to destroy an
entire city with a single explosion
and to circle the world in little
more than an hour has unhinged
the historic role of the national
sovereign state and transformed
it into a preternatual colossus.
The means of national protec-
tion have evolved into the instru-
ments of holocaust and suicide.
If a single nation could possess
a monopoly of the instruments of
modern technology and power, it
is possible that that particular na-
tion could continue to protect its
people and perform its traditional
functions.
But the absence of such a mono-
poly makes it necessary to limit
and to control the uses of that
power and technology in the com-
mon interest-and the common
interest in the modern world can
only be defined as the well-being
and safety of the human species as
a whole, rather than any single
national unit.
SUCH LIMITATION and con-
trol, to be fully effective, cannot
be achieved or sustained within
the context of the present an-
archy. At one point or another,
the general insecurity, tension and
upheaval that are the natural
components of the anarchy may
cancel out the attempts at con-
trol.
The limitation and control of
weapons may reduce tensions but
they cannot create justice in the
affairs among nations, or define
acceptable behavior for nations,
or provide for the maintenance of
peace.
These requirements of safety,
and therefore survival, belong to
a more comprehensive and struc-
tured approach that takes the
form of law.
It is in this sense that world law
is complex. The theoretical bene-
fits of world law are clear enough
but the engineering of consent
that must precede it, and the dis-
parities and diversities in ideology,
traditions and histories, levels of
educational and industrial devel-
opment that have to be accom-
modated or reconciled within it-
all these represent the kind of
complexity with which human in-
telligence has not yet had to deal;
at least, not on that scale.
HERE ARE some of the specific
questions involved in that com-
plexity:
* What should be the basis of
representation in a world legis-
lative assembly? If population,
then a few states with mam-
moth populations would dominate
the world. If being a nation is
sufficient for equality ofnrepre-
sentation then most of the world's
peoples who live in a small num-
ber ofmstates will be governed by
a small number of people in a
large number of states.
If industrial capacity is the
yardstick, then the people who
have been under colonialism or
feudalism are likely to feel that
their have-not status is being
formalized and cemented.
" How is the law to be enforc-
ed? Assuming the resolution of
the problem of representation in
creating a legislative mechanism,
what will the enforcement arm
consist of? An army? How will it
be constituted? On a voluntary
basis?
Is so, what guarantee is there
that such force would not be used

to inflict a world tyranny or even
lead to the use of nuclear force
by men who have access to it?
And if the enforcement arm is not
to have nuclear power, what po-
tency will it have alongside na-

tions that do have such power?
0 If law is the product of gov-
ernment, and if just government
depends on the consent of the
governed, how will a world or-
ganization go about obtaining
such consent?
Will there be a uniform yard-
stick applied to all? Will such a
yardstick contain educational or
cultural measurements, in which
case an intellectual elite will be
created, or will it be devoid of any
measurements except adulthood,
in which case sheer numbers will
have to pass as wisdom? Or will
it be a yardstick difficult to apply
because the combination is con-
trived?
r Are the powers of law to be
confined to security matters? If
so, what about all the other mat-
ters that create insecurity and
tension and ultimately lead to
conflict.
If the powers of law are to be
extended to justice in the rela-
tionships of nations with one an-
other, can the area of justice be
compartmentalized? What about
the question of justice inside na-
tions, especially as it concerns
minority groups?
THESE ARE only a few of the
complexities involved in eliminat-
ing the present world anarchy and
in creating a structure of world
law.
What is most remarkable and
significant, however, about these,
complexities is not the difficulty
in resolving them but the fact
that they are not even being dis-
cussed. Any agenda addressed to
world peace would have to begin
with a consideration of these is-
sues.
Yet no agency of the United Na-
tions, or of regional groupings of
nations, or of individual nations
is addressing itself officially to
the questions. The UN is strug-
gling for its life not just because
the organization is weak but be-
cause men refuse even to consider
how it can be made better.
It is possible that world law is
beyond the reach of human in-
telligence. But we cannot assume
it is. Fatiguing though it may be
to ponder the complexities of
world law, it may not be nearly
so fatiguing as it will be to ponder
the growing casualty lists in Viet
Nam.
INDEED, only by pondering the
connection between Viet Nam and
the absence of world law are we
likely to discover what Viet Nam
is all about.
The proper place, of course, for
such pondering is in the UN. That
is where the machinery of law will
have to operate. Until that hap-
pens, we are alI thought-resistant
barbarians and crude anarchists.

-Associated Press

PRESIDENT LYNDON JOHNSON has no constitutional right to
send Americans to Viet Nam because a declaration of war has not
been passed by Congress-the only body empowered to make war,
according to Sen. Wayne Morse.
Only-, ConTtgress
Can Declare War
By SENATOR WAYNE MORSE split this body politic, so far as
public opinion is concerned, that
From The Congressional Record the President would take little re-
HAVE BEEN heard to say many lief and little comfort from the
times, put I shall continue to polls that he so frequently pulls
be heard to say across the land out of his pocket as an indication
and to the Senate, that our Presi- that the public is behind his
dent has no constitutional author- bloodletting.
ity to send a single American boy The American people are en-
to his death in Asia in the ab- titled to have their Congress act
sence of a declaration of war. in accordance with the Constitu-
The Congress of the United tion in support or rejection of a
States does not have a scintilla declaration of war.
of constitutional right to seek to
delegate to the President of the SECOND, It would be difficult
U.S. the power to make war in to know against whom to declare
the absence of a declaration of war. At the present time, the only
war. Cocountry we could present as a
The Constitution is too precious, basis against which to direct a
and I happen to believe that this declaration of war would be North
administration should be stopped Viet Nam.
by the Congress in conducting an But, as I have stated many times
undeclared war. The American in past months, on the basis of
government should face up to the the present facts, if a proposed
issue as to whether under article declaration of war against North
I, section 8, of the Constitution, Viet Nam came before this body,
it is ready to declare a war, for I would vote against it; in my
only the Congress can declare a judgement, we do not have the
war. slightest justification under i-
There is not a single basis for ternational law, or in keeping
a constitutional interpretation in with our signature on existing
the lawbooks of America that treaties, or on the basis of the
justifies Congress seeking to dele- operative facts in Asia, to declare
gate power to the ,President to war against any country.
make war in the absence of a On the contrary, on the basis
declaration of war. of international law, of treaty ob-
ligations, and of the serious threat
THERE ARE THOSE who do to the peace of the world which
not like to hear me say it, but I we are helping to create in Asia,
believe there are probably two we should reverse our course of
main reasons why there has not action and plead with other na-
been a declaration of war. tions to join us under the pre-
First, it would then make the cedures of the United Nations to
war issue squarely an issue before set up a peace conference, with
the American people: Do you the U.S. sitting at the head of
want to make war formally and that peace table in an endeavor to
declare it? carry out our professed ideal of
Any such recommendation by substituting the rule of law for
the President and any such dec- what has become the American
laration of war resolution intro- jungle claw for the settlement of
duced in the Congress would so the dispute in Asia.

'U' -City Relations Need Definition

DEMS ON 'CAMPAIGN':
State News Charges Invalid

ANN ARBOR COUNCILMEN seemed re-
laxed Monday night as their regular
session came to a close. Communications
from the audience, the last item on their
agenda, were to be heard after an eve-
ning discussing everything from curb-
stones to high-rise rooftops. But an ani-
mated Ann Arbor woman had a message
intended to shake a few foundations-
the Michigan Union's, City Hall's, and
the Administration Building's.
The story she related was lurid, if not
fantastic.L
Her son had lost nearly $500 in what
she was told was "a three-day marathon
pool competition" at the Michigan Union.
Her son appeared to have been beaten,
she said, although he explained his bruis-
es were the result of "a fall down the
stairs." He had not been home for three
days.
THE MOTHER said she had names of
University students who had fleeced
her son. She also reported being' intimi-
dated by phone by these individuals.
The woman stated that the students
involved were receiving advice from stu-
dents in the Law School.
Outwardly embittered, the mother said
that constant attempts at obtaining ac-
tion from the University and the -police
department were futile. Frustrated, she
turned to Council for aid, asking that
University students receive the same
treatment as residents.
Her son, a minor, could not legally sign
a complaint, she said. But she could-and
would.
The mother was familiar with impro-
prieties of University students. She said
she summoned police to her apartment
one weekend this semester when students

on the floor above gave a party that cul-
minated in "bottles of beer" being thrown
out a window. She said that she barely
missed injury from the flying beer bombs.
SHE ASKED COUNCIL why University
students should be protected from po-
lice law enforcement by "an iron wall."
There is room for doubt in her story.
Students and faculty, jolted by her
attack, could probably respond more in-
telligently and more vindictively to her
remarks to Council.
But because the matter is so fantastic,
it must be treated with the greatest seri-
ousness, both by the University and the
community. It cannot be ignored.
If the woman and her family have been
wronged--and this seems likely-she must
get some satisfaction.
But more important, the positions tak-
en by the University and community on
such an incident must be stated.
THIS ISSUE, tinged with sensational-
ism, became official business when it
was brought before Council. Councilmen
hearing the communication appeared sin-'
cerely and seriously interested. Further
action, which is commanded now because
of Council's involvement, must continue
with this feeling.
An attack has been leveled at the
University and its students. The attack
is complete, but there is opportunity for
response and justice.
Campus morality and student-commu-
nity interests are common but lively is-
sues that will continue to arise as long as
the civic and campus communities re-
main interdependent. Councilmen seri-
ously consider student interests at ses-
sions each week, and students learn to

By JOHN MEREDITH
SIX DAYS have elapsed since
Charles Wells, editor-in-chief
of Michigan State University's
student newspaper, attacked the
Democratic Party for "a cam-
paign" to increase its "political
influence over this state's colleges
and universities."
Although Wells has stood by his
story, there has been almost no
public support for his position. His
allegations have been denied-but
with few exceptions, the denials
have come from people who have
an interest in discrediting the
article.
The truth about the Democratic
"campaign" has thus been con-
cealed beneath a veil of charges
and denials. Of course, if the
campaign exists as Wells said it
does, this will eventually become
self-evident; but, if the article is
only partially correct, the issues
will soon slip out of the public
eye to join the numerous earlier
controversies now kept alive only
in a semi-mythological form by
those who like to reminisce about
university politics.
This is both inevitable and un-
fortunate: inevitable because self-
interest and irrelevant gossip al-
ways distort matters of this kind;
unfortunate because the serious
allegations publicized in the ar-
ticle demand clarification to pre-
vent the uncertainty and distor-
tion from leaving permanent scars
on the people involved.
THE BEST that can be done
now, however, is a little educated
guesswork-and the available in-
formationtends to indicate that
at least some of the evidence cited
in Well's article is correct but that
his "campaign" theme is inac-
curate and based on exaggeration.

Ferency, selected Democrats on
MSU'sfaculty and staff and at
least two Democratic members of
the university's Board of Trustees.
Wells found two aspects of the
meeting pertinent to his theme.
First, it wasrcalled by Ferency "'to
consider creation of a Committee
on Higher Education for the
(Democratic) Party-from mem-
bers of staffs of the public uni-
versities and colleges, the' boards
of control, and other party mem-
bers.' " Second, Trustee Clair
White (D-Bay City) told faculty
members in attendance "to come
to members of the Board of Trus-
tees instead of going through MSU
administrative channels with their
problems."
The conclusion we are supposed
to draw from this is obvious: The
organization of the Committee on
Higher Education is a conscious
attempt by the Democrats to in-
volve themselves in internal policy
decisions at state universities, and
White's suggestion that Demo-
cratic faculty members go directly
to the predominantly Democratic
board is an example of the type
of partisanship that can be ex-
pected in the future.
THIS DOES NOT, however,
seem to be the case. According to
Ferency, the committee will be
purely partisan, but it definitely
will not have anything to do with
running the university. Its sole
function will be to advise the
party on policy positions-some-
thing which faculty members have
done informally in the past. And,
while it will undoubtedly consider
education policy, this will be only
one of many topics to be examin-
ed.
This outline of the committee's
projected functions has been veri-
fied by a Democratic State Cen-

the confusionaboutthe June 17
meeting? Some further examina-
tion suggests the following ex-
planation as a strong possibility.
To begin with, the meeting was
unstructured. According to one
participant, discussion covered a
wide range of topics in a some-
what haphazzard fashion, with at-
tention given to the proper role
of a Democratic member of the
academic community.
IT IS' NOT illogical to assume
that the relationship among the
faculty, the administration and
the Board of Trustees was brought
up in the conversation; and it is
not unlikely that a little griping
became involved. Such a situation.
would be susceptible to a few par-
tisan statements, very possibly not
backed by serious intent. It is
not hard to see, either, how
White's controversial remark
could have come up in these or
similar circumstances.
If considered in this perspective,
the meeting reveals nothing more
than perhaps a few personality
clashes and several isolated cases
of inappropriate politicking.
In addition to the June 17 meet-
ing, Wells backed up his argu-
ment with several other instances
of Democratic involvement at
MSU. However, enough informa-
tion to evaluate these is not yet
available. Since no student editor
in his right mind would fabricate
such evidence, it must be assumed
that Wells had apparently reliable
sources. But, whether these
sources were, in fact, reliable-
and, if they were, whether Wells
was correct in interpreting the
events as; part of a campaign-is
open to question.
Outside of the meeting, none
of the incidents display the party
planning that would make it fit
into the organizational pattern of

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
'Keep of f the Grass':
This Goes Too Far

I

4

To the Editor:
" RASS IS the forgiveness of
N: ure- her constant bene-
diction." How doth the soul
tremble in ectasy, and the eye
o'erspill its teary burden!Truly,
we have been wrong. Banality, thy
name isShakespeare, Milton,
Wordsworth. Raise high, instead,
the banner of John James Ingalls,
Kansas politician, flatulent orator,
and patron saint of the Plant De-
partment!

make a tree that bears a nest of
robins in her hair.
PEACE TO you, now-distraught
groundsmen. We did not know
that it was your grass, that we
had cursed your God. Nor could
we know that from your scholars'
shelves would ooze thebathos of
a prairie' bard who passed this
life two years before the time you
date his song.
Let us now praise famous men.

'I